Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

PlanetSpores.ca
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Spirituality & Mysticism
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20547305 -

I read a really interesting book by R.A.W. once in which he claims to have had an acquaintance that ate LSD with the man.  (I believe it was Cosmic Trigger 1)  Some really far out things ensued and I've always been curious about the man since.

I remember seeing the guy in the original video you posted "debunking" Uri but I mean just seemed like half assed logic to me.  Plus consciousness is a spectrum.  Seems like making somebody nervous by putting them in a situation like that would totally throw off whatever they were trying to accomplish.

Hell I live in a maybe world man.  I try never to be certain.


--------------------
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, conn a ship, write a
sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the
dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve an
equation, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.- Robert A. Heinlein
Saint RedBow of the Shroomey Loomey-Patron Saint of Sandbaggin Sumbitchs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: TheGreenArrow]
    #20547355 -

oh i see, i never knew that, will have to search it :smile:

the man in the video i posted is someone else, but yes your correct if someone is put of it will attack the abilities... just like someone trying out for the x factor and has their first huge performance .. you sometimes see them completely mess up because of the nerves.

but that tk man would have won have performed tk if it wasnt for the air conditioning,

either way you can tell is was rehearsed by randi, i mean how would he know the exact positioning of the hands if he didnt set it up to be like that :wink:

i honestly think randi will one day expose himself as the greatest illusionist to ever walk on the face of the earth and expose that the money was an illusion

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20547472 -

Greatest or shittiest. Depending on where your reality tunnel lies. :lol:

You should shoot me a :pm: with an e-mail I may have an extra copy of that book laying around.


--------------------
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, conn a ship, write a
sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the
dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve an
equation, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.- Robert A. Heinlein
Saint RedBow of the Shroomey Loomey-Patron Saint of Sandbaggin Sumbitchs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: Sun King]
    #20547488 -

Sun King said:
leedi23 said:
Can i move it to that area of the forum?


Use telekinesis.


:lol: and bring a sense of humor.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: TheGreenArrow]
    #20547513 -
Log in to view attachment

Check it out.


--------------------
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an
invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, conn a ship, write a
sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the
dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve an
equation, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a
computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
Specialization is for insects.- Robert A. Heinlein
Saint RedBow of the Shroomey Loomey-Patron Saint of Sandbaggin Sumbitchs

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: TheGreenArrow]
    #20547698 -

Thank you will have a read of that later :smile:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20547794 -

So far no news from the mods, so I guess we can discuss your claims here until we hear from them.


leedi23 said:
What is proof? Is the Randi Challenge proof? If it is what makes it proof?


The fact you are asking these questions reveal a profound misunderstanding of what would constitute evidence for your paranormal claims.

First of all, I am not a scientist, nor do I have much knowledge about the philosophy of science, but we can start with a little bit of common sense and use practical examples.

If you want to demonstrate your ability to move an object with your mind, you have do it in such a way that absolutely nothing else but your mind could cause the movement of such object.

Your video showing you moving a bush in a garden proves absolutely nothing for example, since the air currents in an outdoor setting can also cause the bush to move. In fact, in your video, the big trees in the background are moving in a way that suggest the wind is really responsible for the movement of the bush, and not your mind.

To demonstrate your ability to move objects with your mind, you would have to create a setting where absolutely every exterior interference with the object is eliminated, including possible air currents, magnetism, vibrations, etc… And then move the object with your mind.

Then you should be able to repeat the experience.

This wouldn't constitute a "scientific proof", since I believe this can be only obtained in mathematics and logic, but that would be a convincing evidence for all to see.

Until now, such evidence has never been provided, hence the skeptics attitude towards such claims.

It is not close-mindedness, just a lack of gullibility.


--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin] * 1
    #20548148 -

.

Edited by leedi23 (09/10/14 02:55 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548193 -

leedi23 said:
What is proof? Is the Randi Challenge proof? If it is what makes it proof?


The fact you are asking these questions reveal a profound misunderstanding of what would constitute evidence for your paranormal claims.

First of all, I am not a scientist, nor do I have much knowledge about the philosophy of science, but we can start with a little bit of common sense and use practical examples.

If you want to demonstrate your ability to move an object with your mind, you have do it in such a way that absolutely nothing else but your mind could cause the movement of such object.

Your video showing you moving a bush in a garden proves absolutely nothing for example, since the air currents in an outdoor setting can also cause the bush to move. In fact, in your video, the big trees in the background are moving in a way that suggest the wind is really responsible for the movement of the bush, and not your mind.

To demonstrate your ability to move objects with your mind, you would have to create a setting where absolutely every exterior interference with the object is eliminated, including possible air currents, magnetism, vibrations, etc… And then move the object with your mind.

Then you should be able to repeat the experience.

This wouldn't constitute a "scientific proof", since I believe this can be only obtained in mathematics and logic, but that would be a convincing evidence for all to see.

Until now, such evidence has never been provided, hence the skeptics attitude towards such claims.

It is not close-mindedness, just a lack of gullibility.


this was an example of what skeptics who have no understanding of this say, your completely correct.. that was my point, the randi show does not have all of the things you listed but yet skeptics give out the randi challenge as if it means something significant when in fact it does not, that was the point of why i said that,

i do not question what would be classed as real proof because i know what it takes for something like this to be classed as proof, the sad thing is it will always come back to the randi show even though it has no true meaning in terms of proof,

sadly not 1 organisation will test real tk only micro tk is tested currently, well those facts are true in the uk anyway so unsure about the rest of the world...

the fact that organisations refuse to test it because its too much hard work leaves the randi show as a skeptics way of saying "prove it"

im guessing you had the wrong impression of those questions.

with the outdoor stuff, yes its not testable but yet the demonstration is still available, it cant be tested but you can see obvious connection that works in sync with me and my movements, the fact that it can be repeated over and over shouldnt be classed as rubbish like some think, no should it be classed as chance because as iv said before chance is rare and to perform over and over would class the demonstrations as something that is not chance,

but your correct it holds no proof BUT the demonstration is still there showing multiple times a connection between the plant and me,

for the outdoor stuff to be regarded as fact would require indoor stuff to be proven as fact first, my objective of all of this is to try and open peoples eyes a little into the mind of a bias skeptic and show how these challenges are scam, by doing this maybe 1 day these organisations like the randi show ect will no longer exist and then maybe 1 real research organisation will step up and test real tk no micro, but the fact is everything currently relies on the randi show and as its impossible to ever win it can never be taken seriously

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20548196 -

nice video :smile:


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548239 -

Please read my post again. This paragraph in particular :

easyskunkin said:
To demonstrate your ability to move objects with your mind, you would have to create a setting where absolutely every exterior interference with the object is eliminated, including possible air currents, magnetism, vibrations, etc… And then move the object with your mind.




--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548299 -

easyskunkin said:
Please read my post again. This paragraph in particular :

easyskunkin said:
To demonstrate your ability to move objects with your mind, you would have to create a setting where absolutely every exterior interference with the object is eliminated, including possible air currents, magnetism, vibrations, etc… And then move the object with your mind.




i did read it, what you getting at?

i agreed with you

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20548301 -

leedi23 said:
this was an example of what skeptics who have no understanding of this say, your completely correct.. that was my point, the randi show does not have all of the things you listed but yet skeptics give out the randi challenge as if it means something significant when in fact it does not, that was the point of why i said that,

i do not question what would be classed as real proof because i know what it takes for something like this to be classed as proof, the sad thing is it will always come back to the randi show even though it has no true meaning in terms of proof,

sadly not 1 organisation will test real tk only micro tk is tested currently, well those facts are true in the uk anyway so unsure about the rest of the world...

the fact that organisations refuse to test it because its too much hard work leaves the randi show as a skeptics way of saying "prove it"

im guessing you had the wrong impression of those questions.

with the outdoor stuff, yes its not testable but yet the demonstration is still available, it cant be tested but you can see obvious connection that works in sync with me and my movements, the fact that it can be repeated over and over shouldnt be classed as rubbish like some think, no should it be classed as chance because as iv said before chance is rare and to perform over and over would class the demonstrations as something that is not chance,

but your correct it holds no proof BUT the demonstration is still there showing multiple times a connection between the plant and me,

for the outdoor stuff to be regarded as fact would require indoor stuff to be proven as fact first, my objective of all of this is to try and open peoples eyes a little into the mind of a bias skeptic and show how these challenges are scam, by doing this maybe 1 day these organisations like the randi show ect will no longer exist and then maybe 1 real research organisation will step up and test real tk no micro, but the fact is everything currently relies on the randi show and as its impossible to ever win it can never be taken seriously


Let's just forget about the Randi challenge, even thought I believe it abides by these rules...

Diploid said:
1) The methodology is such that the result MUST be obvious on its face to every observer and not require any kind of interpretation or opinion of a judge because that would open the door to disputes by those who interpret differently.

2) The methodology is such that the claimant will have no opportunity to cheat as thousands have tried to do in the 50 years the prize money has been on the table.

3) The methodology is such that the chance for a lucky win (a statistical fluke) will be vanishingly small, thus ensuring that a win will almost-certainly constitute genuine supernatural ability and not simply a "lucky guess".




...and that no claimant until now has passed the preliminary test, designed in a way they agreed to.

The standard for evidence I described in my post (creating a setting where absolutely all external interference with the object are eliminated) is not met by your video.


--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: deff]
    #20548305 -

deff said:
nice video :smile:


thank you :smile:

its stated as proof as the debunker requested.. so he can debunk a video he told me to make im guessing

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548309 -

easyskunkin said:
Please read my post again. This paragraph in particular :

easyskunkin said:
To demonstrate your ability to move objects with your mind, you would have to create a setting where absolutely every exterior interference with the object is eliminated, including possible air currents, magnetism, vibrations, etc… And then move the object with your mind.




If the claim is that one can move an object entirely with one's mind, then you are indeed correct.  If, on the other hand, the claim is that the mind can influence the random movements of object in motion, such as the outcome of a coin flip, then that involves other experimental protocols.  That's why some of the most interesting telekinesis experiments involve random number generators.  As for the Randi Challenge, I prefer to look at metadata from years of aggregated scientific experiments, rather than a one-off bet.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548348 -

Diploid said:
1) The methodology is such that the result MUST be obvious on its face to every observer and not require any kind of interpretation or opinion of a judge because that would open the door to disputes by those who interpret differently.

2) The methodology is such that the claimant will have no opportunity to cheat as thousands have tried to do in the 50 years the prize money has been on the table.

3) The methodology is such that the chance for a lucky win (a statistical fluke) will be vanishingly small, thus ensuring that a win will almost-certainly constitute genuine supernatural ability and not simply a "lucky guess".




...and that no claimant until now has passed the preliminary test, designed in a way they agreed to.

The standard for evidence I described in my post (creating a setting where absolutely all external interference with the object are eliminated) is not met by your video.


i never said it was met by my video, what your saying is not linked to what i said..

i agreed with the conditions you stated

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: Silversoul]
    #20548443 -

Silversoul said:
If the claim is that one can move an object entirely with one's mind, then you are indeed correct.  If, on the other hand, the claim is that the mind can influence the random movements of object in motion, such as the outcome of a coin flip, then that involves other experimental protocols. 


Most definitely. But I believe the OP's claims to be the former.


--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20548456 -

leedi23 said:
i never said it was met by my video, what your saying is not linked to what i said..

i agreed with the conditions you stated


You posted the video after my post, I inferred it was a response to it.


--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: easyskunkin]
    #20548479 -

easyskunkin said:
leedi23 said:
i never said it was met by my video, what your saying is not linked to what i said..

i agreed with the conditions you stated


You posted the video after my post, I inferred it was a response to it.


oh i see,

just a thought, im only on here to meet other spiritual people and not for mushrooms,

im wondering because iv posted my company and obviously has my full name ect ... will the police be looking to raid my house?

i didnt think of that but if they do oh well nice payout for me :laugh:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: The skeptic's [Re: leedi23]
    #20548484 -

No, don't worry.


--------------------
L'intérêt à croire une chose n'est pas une preuve de l'existence de cette chose.
Voltaire ; Remarques sur les pensées de Pascal (1728)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Spirituality & Mysticism
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Telekinesis
( 1 2 all )		 Sporetacus 2,569 29 07/17/13 04:30 PM
by Activeimagination
* Recurring dreams of telekinesis and strange oneironautic phenomena... deCypher 2,637 6 11/27/08 02:35 AM
by Ego Death
* So Called - Telekinesis jivJaN 2,232 11 01/05/09 05:36 AM
by Diaboleros
* A different kind of skepticism onlynow 968 5 10/22/07 05:35 AM
by OMniversal
* Bible argument? Syle 943 10 06/10/07 03:42 PM
by Syle
* do you have magic powers?
( 1 2 3 all )		 Telepylus 7,309 43 09/25/18 03:13 PM
by Green7Alchemist
* Psychophysics & Energy Healing : The Wave of the Future MAIA 12,199 4 06/29/06 02:01 PM
by Sinbad
* The MR&P Community Vote -- Wiccan_Seeker as a local moderator
( 1 2 all )		 AsanteM 4,635 30 10/31/05 02:54 PM
by Asante

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, Asante, Shroomism, Rose, Kickle, yogabunny, Northerner, DividedQuantum
2,001 topic views. 0 members, 14 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 16 queries.